[dmitrygr]

I struggled in vain to see what this has to do with rust. The answer is nothing other than the 4 lines of sample code shown are in Rust. The actually useful nugget of knowledge contained therein (one can create ICMP packets without being root on MacOS or Linux) is language agnostic.

So... why? Should I now add "in C" or "in assembly" to the end of all my article titles?

[franga2000]

It's a lot more than 4 lines of sample code, in fact on my screen, it looks like it's more code than text. This is closer to a Rust tutorial then a low-level networking explainer, so yeah, it makes sense to say "in Rust". If I wanted to do this in C, this would not be the best resource.

[IshKebab]

Yeah it would definitely be a good idea for the assembly ones. Maybe not C since C has kind of been the de facto language for this stuff for decades so it's implied.

[bpbp-mango]

If you want

[debugnik]

Agreed. I don't dislike Rust as a language, but it annoys me how its practitioners add the "[written] in Rust" tagline to every single thing they do that's otherwise unrelated to Rust. Specially when their code or dependencies are full of unverified unsafe blocks, which defeats the selling point.